Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

teenvogue.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 243 posts

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#141

Post by ceejayoz »

germinalphrase wrote: post #58
davidguetta wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have weirdly mixed feelings on your comment. - I agree that parents who publicize their children on social media are massive creep in my opinion, who do a massive invasion of the child privacy. That should almost be illegal in my opinion since the child can't consent. - At the same time saying that no skin should ever be shown ever because "it titills sexual creeps" is a dark road that points in a direction which i…

You’re underselling the social and financial dynamic of specifically recording children in minimal clothing and asking them to perform for anonymous strangers on the internet. It’s entirely different than standard social standards about clothing and nudity in public.

Precisely.

A prominent example; it's quite the read: https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2022-12-18/...

> But it is the suit filed by 11 former members of the Squad that has placed the Piper Rockelle saga at the center of an explosive online controversy. The plaintiffs, all of whom are minors, allege in the lawsuit that Smith offered to show an 11-year-old girl how to perform oral sex, mailed Piper’s underwear to men and pretended to be a raunchy version of the family’s dead cat while inappropriately touching and harassing the children.

> Trimmer, a photographer, said Smith often urged the kids to pose more provocatively for thumbnail photo shoots — the images used to promote YouTube videos. She would frequently tell the Squad members to make ‘sexy kissing faces’ for thumbnails, to ‘push their butts out,’ to ‘suck their stomachs in,’ ‘wear something sluttier’ and would otherwise position Plaintiffs’ bodies in explicitly and sexually suggestive positions,” the complaint said.

> Numerous Squad members also allege that Smith regularly interacted online with a man posing as a young girl named “Megan” who sent her money, a Gucci bag, laptops, lawn furniture and other expensive gifts in exchange for images of Piper. In the lawsuit, Corinne said she witnessed Smith mail “several of Piper’s soiled training bras and panties to an unknown individual,” adding that Smith told her “old men like to smell this stuff.”

They know who the audience is.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#142

Post by hackinthebochs »

PuppyTailWags wrote: post #129
luckylion wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not quite (because the chance of success is very small), but if you're a successful influencer and then exploit the fact that you have children for even more growth, the trauma is probably small and the therapy is easily covered with the amounts of money you're making (which makes SWE salaries look tiny in comparison). It's not positive, but it's "I have a splinter in my finger" relatively to what many (most?) childr…

I think you're misunderstanding the realistic state of child influencers. These children have no guarantee of access to any money they "earn", and also the chance of earning that much is quite low. Just like most influencers, most of them don't make anywhere near a fulltime income an adult could make even on minimum wage, but are left with lifelong distortions of how to be a person that have to be unlearned. I don't…

>but are left with lifelong distortions of how to be a person that have to be unlearned.

"Lifelong distortion" is a strong claim that hasn't been demonstrated. I wonder how much of this consternation for kids being present online is a generational thing. People from the generation where privacy was the default are reacting badly to the movement towards no privacy being the default. Of course, those from the old generation take it for granted that their way of living is the right way and the alternative is "distortion". I'm also from that generation and I cringe at how easily people destroy their own privacy. But I don't make the mistake of assuming this emotion has normative value. The world is moving to a social-media infused existence. Being a digital luddite isn't obviously the superior lifestyle. Preventing kids from making the most of it isn't obviously in their best interests.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#143

Post by sylens »

zomgwat wrote: post #96
ivraatiems wrote: post #78

I have some good friends who've gone the other way: they've asked that there be as close to no photos or videos of their child on any social media as possible. They don't post about him online, and they keep pictures of him in photo albums. When he was born, they asked all of us to please refrain from taking photos of him without their permission. I completely support this and I intend to do something similar for my…

My wife and I have done similar. We privately share photos. It took a bit for my mom to get over the fact that she can’t post pictures of her grandkids on Facebook but I was eventually able to explain why in terms she understood.

We are also doing this. I'm amazed at how much some people share of their kids online.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#144

Post by mablopoule »

jstarfish wrote: post #133
mablopoule wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, society would absolutely be culturally impoverished if this would be considered off-limit. Limiting the space of 'allowed' expression and saying it's okay because culture is not essential isn't really the best path to take as a society.

If you Photoshop the penis out, there would be nothing remarkable about the cover. It was child exploitation as a marketing gimmick. I think the Scorpions did something similar with putting an underage girl on the Virgin Killer album, but that may have been non-photographic (not looking it up). Decades later, Nirvana is still a topic of discussion because of it (and still earning royalties), while the kid in question…

If you let the penis visible, there is still not that much remarkable. The picture was mainly about a baby swimming toward a bill used as a bait.

There is at least one picture of me (not on social media, admittedly), as a toddler, buck naked in a pool with another toddler. It was (and still is) and innocent picture even with the visible genitalia. So no, it's not automatically "depravity" to show nude people, even kids.

Don't be mistaken, I'm not for child exploration, stuff like kids beauty pageant, or over-exposed young people are downright creepy, but I'm reacting at the idea of making any representation of kids taboo.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#145

Post by StrangeATractor »

paperwasp42 wrote: post #136

One of the most horrifying social media pages I've seen was an influencer who billed herself as a "trans activist" and documented every moment of her trans daughter's life. This poor kid was 8-years-old and attempted suicide on a regular basis. Every time she tried to kill herself, the mom would document the gritty details, post pictures and details about it online (and of course get massive likes/shares by well-inte…

FFS nobody's called CPS?

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#146

Post by joshcanhelp »

ivraatiems wrote: post #78

I have some good friends who've gone the other way: they've asked that there be as close to no photos or videos of their child on any social media as possible. They don't post about him online, and they keep pictures of him in photo albums. When he was born, they asked all of us to please refrain from taking photos of him without their permission. I completely support this and I intend to do something similar for my…

Hard same on this. I didn’t think about it for the first few years of being a parent but, several years ago, I deleted all photos of my kids on social media, as well as a few random ones I had on my blog (followed soon after by deleting all non-professional social media content and accounts). Triggered by an article I read (I wish I’d kept it), it occurred to me that I didn’t have the right to use my kids’ images without their permission. All it once, it felt unfair and irresponsible. Soon after, my oldest asked me, after taking her picture, something to the effect of “is that going to be on the internet?” I was pleased to say “no, never.”

Aside: I wonder if it’s going to be a different experience for kids in the generations that have thousands of photos from their childhood available to them. As someone interested in knowing more about my past, I can’t help but to think it will be a good thing to know all the cool stuff they did, whether they remember it or not.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#147

Post by rayiner »

PuppyTailWags wrote: post #102
rayiner wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Children are not born owing their parents anything. Yes they are. That is the function of children with respect to parents in the circle of life, just as it is the function of parents to care for children. Not all obligations are ones you voluntarily undertake. Of course there are boundaries to the scope of that obligation. But those are defined by society, not "consent." The problem in Claire's story is that the p…

More importantly, assuming that children are born owing their parents anything leads to deeply unhealthy societal outcomes: - This enables abusive parenting styles and forces adult children to need to unlearn this lie in order to come to terms with their abuse; - This enables parents having an outsized influence on adult children, such as controlling their sexuality, interests, physical location, etc; Frankly: the pa…

Nobody chooses to be born. Does that mean that there are no moral obligations that arise by virtue of one’s existence as a human? Can obligations only arise from voluntary choice?

“Choice” is not the be-all end-all of morality (or, really, even particularly important). The obligation for parents to care for their children and vice versa arises from the nature of people and the nature of the relationship. Parents have an obligation to care for children even when they didn’t choose to have children. Conversely, children have an obligation to care for parents even though they didn’t choose to be born.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#148

Post by jstarfish »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #116
polygamous_bat wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem I see here is where would the "line" be? That is, when does that video you post on Instagram of your family at Disney or someone blowing out candles at a birthday stop being just a family video and starts being content? A simpler definition could be how a content is meant to be spread; whether it is "broadcast" vs. "multicast/unicast". Like, I cannot think of any legitimate reasons a kid's "performance"…

Would you have allowed America’s Funniest Home Videos? Or sharing of videos on Youtube like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Bit_My_Finger Of course, when there was no money in it, it was easier to assume children were not being harmed or otherwise manipulated for the purpose of making the video.

AFHC and the stations that aired it were at least accountable to the FCC (and advertisers) if things got weird. Advertisers knew what the show entailed.

There is no such licensing or enforcement mechanism for amateur online content creators (except 2257), and the "stations" are absolved of any complicity (230). Advertisers have little idea what content they're sponsoring since content delivery is a shell game. Creators can pivot from toy unboxing videos to dildo recommendations mid-stream without any oversight.

It took upstream payment processors going rogue to force compliance with 2257, because apparently we don't have a functional government to enforce its own laws anymore. The situation is not at all the same.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#149

Post by rayiner »

dlisboa wrote: post #128
rayiner wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Children are not born owing their parents anything. Yes they are. That is the function of children with respect to parents in the circle of life, just as it is the function of parents to care for children. Not all obligations are ones you voluntarily undertake. Of course there are boundaries to the scope of that obligation. But those are defined by society, not "consent." The problem in Claire's story is that the p…

Going into parenthood with that mentality is a surefire way of making sure the children won't care at all about that "obligation". People take care of their families because of a bond that has nothing to do with blood. That bond is uniquely about mutual feelings and as a parent we have only a few years to make that bond last a lifetime. If it's formed on top of obligations and resentment it'll break the first chance…

Only in societies, like certain parts of America, beset with pathological levels of individualism. In healthy societies, that obligation generally doesn’t lead to resentment because (1) it’s a mutual and reciprocal obligation; and (2) people understand that they have roles and obligations that arise by virtue of their very existence as a human being.

To be clear, in this particular example the parents are breaching their side of the obligation by burdening their kid while they’re still healthy and able to work.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#150

Post by kenjackson »

ivraatiems wrote: post #78

I have some good friends who've gone the other way: they've asked that there be as close to no photos or videos of their child on any social media as possible. They don't post about him online, and they keep pictures of him in photo albums. When he was born, they asked all of us to please refrain from taking photos of him without their permission. I completely support this and I intend to do something similar for my…

My sister has gone to this extreme, and I do feel like it is extreme. She doesn't allow her kids to do sports, for example, for fear of their name or image getting out. In contrast, as my kids play sports, most of their peers are trying to build their brand -- as NIL deals are almost directly correlated with your social media popularity.

To me this feels like the cell phone discussions of the mid-90s (people who refused to get cell phones because they didn't want to be constantly connected). Eventually almost everyone realizes that the world has changed. Unless you keep your kid from interacting with the world, there will eventually be little you can do to prevent them from having some online presence.

Post reply on HN